Friday, July 31, 2015

Complexity is the prodigy of the world. Simplicity is the sensation of the universe. Behind complexity, there is always simplicity to be revealed. Inside simplicity, there is always complexity to be discovered (Gang Yu)The problem of simplicity in science is a philosophical one and it is not an easy one. See please the paper/booklet at OTHER.

Also you can learn a lot of things, what's true quite contradictory but in part complimentary from these 97 smart quotations:

The main difficulty arises from the fact that the concept of simplicity itself is very complex and is very specific for each case as description and a challenge for measurement.The problem of simplicity in Science is a pragmatic one, in my opinion all the problems are actually complex and therefore overly simplistic hypotheses are doing harm-useless being worse than bad.

When even the most complex multi-parameter scientific facts are engineered in technologies, the processes have to be made simple usable, easily manageable.

AN EQUIVALENT OF THE MICHELSON-MORLEY EXPERIMENT FOR LENR

Dr, Edmund Storms, author of the best LENR science books- and of many instructive papers also a great all round LENR experimentalist, has decided to demonstrate the validity of his original theory by direct planned experiments. He covers all the expenses from his personal founds. Given the position of this theory in the LENR field, this is an experiment of potential historic, game changing importance.Ed's theory and my ideas are in contradiction, however this is not more relevant now. It is my pleasant duty to wish Ed success in his bold endeavor.The experimental plan of Ed Storms:To interested colleagues,

I'm starting a relatively rare kind of project for this field. I have designed and built a Seebeck type calorimeter for the purpose of testing a theory, in this case my theory. First, an attempt will be made to achieve reproducible heat production by applying my theory to the treatment of palladium-based samples. The treatment will be designed to create cracks in which I propose the LENR process takes place. Once an active sample is obtained, it will be studied as the cathode in an electrolytic cell placed in a calorimeter. A variety of behaviors will be explored including loading behavior, emission of photon radiation, effect of temperature on energy production, and the effect of laser light. The cathode can be rotated with respect to the GM detector and the laser to determine whether the angle of emitted or applied radiation relative to the surface is important.

Based on my theory, I predict that all occasions when LENR is observed, the same mechanism is operating. Therefore, information obtained using PdD would apply to all other materials and isotopes of hydrogen found to produce the same phenomenon. The electrolytic method is chosen for this study because it is the most explored and best understood of the various methods known to initiate LENR. Nevertheless, the calorimeter would permit use of any other methods for initiating the effect, but on a small scale. The size of the sample is not important as long as accuracy of the measurement is sufficient large. The calorimeter used here is designed to have very high accuracy, which will be demonstrated in due course.

The following predictions will be explored:

1. The hydrogen isotope composition achieved by the material only affects the rate of the reaction by affecting the availability of hydrogen to the NAE, with a significant rate being possible at low compositions when the amount of NAE is sufficiently large.2. The rate of the LENR reaction is affected by temperature only as result of how it effects the diffusion rate of hydrogen through the material.3. Photon radiation will be emitted when LENR occurs, with a particular relationship between the angle between the surface and the detector.4. The rate of the LENR reaction already underway can be increased by application of laser light, with an increased reaction rate as the energy of the light is increased. An enhanced effect can be expected when the frequency matches the dimension of an active crack.5. Generation of excess energy does not require extended electrolysis when the NAE is created in advance.

The results of this study will be submitted to this discussion group periodically. I do this to both educate as as to help me assemble my own thoughts about what I find. Because this work is self-funded, I'm not restrained by a funder who is only interested in making money from the work. Nevertheless, if this work is successful in achieving the stated goals, I would hope to receive significant support to explore the phenomenon in more detail. Also, these reports will make replication easier if someone were so inclined.

Steven N. Karels:We will give due information about the performance data after the tests on course will have been completed. So far I can only, responsibly, say that the results at the end of the tests on course could be positive, as I hope, but also could be negative. It is obvious that in this situation it would be plethoric to talk of COP.Warm Regards,A.R.

Frank Acland:Now at 08.30 a.m. of Thursday July 31st the 1 MW E-Cat is going stable, presently in ssm. Today at 03.12 a.m. we had a problem in one of the 4 reactors, I can’t disclose the nature of. It has been repaired in about 4 hours and at 07.12 the repaired reactor has been put again in operation. During the reparation the power of the plant has been reduced down to 750 kW,Warm Regards,A.R.

Thursday, July 30, 2015

MOTTOThere are no such things as applied sciences, only applications of science. (Louis Pasteur)Dear Friends,I am happy to report that my appeal to bridge building in the LENR community has received a very positive, constructive response. Angelo Ovidi from Kresenn, one of the leaders of LENR-Cities, writes: I completely agree with you that the worst enemy of LENR is research fragmentation and, personally, I always worked to remove obstacles that for some reason seem dividing scientists in LENR community. Also I always underlined the overlapping of LENR research with many other fields of physics and chemistry considered not controversial. I think that we should all working for the common goal to unveil the full picture of this new field of research, involving also scientists outside this 'world' and make such researches accessible also to people opposing to them. The first allied of rejection is the fear of the unknown. I will forward your request to the scientists in our team for a comment.Two flawed classes of theories are drowned in molten nickel?Thank you, dear Angelo- I hope there will be possible a dialog with our open-mindednon-prejudiced colleagues mainly those who still are in search of the truth, not those convinced they have found it.I must repeat it- the breakthrough ( it breaks through the old logic and certainty in any case) revelation of Andrea Rossi of yesterday- there can be Hottest E-cats (the name appeared at the Italian Don Quixote Forum) working at temperatures higher than the melting temperature of nickel- can trigger a total collapse on the market of LENR theories. If LENR can happen with molten metal - then both LENR in lattice and LENR in nanocracks with hydrotons doing the nuclear miracle- are not valid.However the issue can be more complex, Francesco Piantelli has shown that alltransition metals work (in his kind of LENR) if this is valid here too- it is suspected that iron is present in the mixture- melting point 1538 C, But there are too many unknown unknowns in this Hottest E-Cat story. We have to wait and to cooperate for creating other LENR front-line research units.DAILY NEWS

Jack Witter:Yes, if the results will be positive we will start a strong producion. We are already organizing it. Obviously we need solid and sure results from the tests on course on the 1 MW plant. I sympathize with all the people that is waiting for the E-Cat for sale, but I’m sure they are smart and understand that we can put for sale this product massively at two conditions:1- we must be 100% sure of the sucess2- we must be able to propose the E-Cat at a price that will make reverse engineering from our competitors useless. I am not decoubertinian and I am not oriented to give graciously to my competitors our technology for free.When we will be ready, we will attack massively. A premature attack could be devastating for Leonardo Corporation and its Licensees in all the world and for the present and future investors, necessary to generate a real worldwide expansion. The pressure we are getting to act prematurely comes mainly from our competitors, sometime disguised as “friends”.Warm Regards,A.R.

Wednesday, July 29, 2015

A QUOTATION BY PROF. ANDREW MEULENBERG:"We are more limited by what we know too well than by what we do not know." Most physicists 'know' that CF cannot be nuclear, therefore they can ignore the facts and, in many cases, they try to 'suppress' the 'heresy'. Engineers and chemists are more practical. If shown that something can work, engineers can make it work better and chemists will often find a different (perhaps better) way of doing it."It is probable not an answer to my editorial of yesterday because it was published a few days before it, however I know some cases in which the echo of an ide was heard before the idea itself.Extended studies show incontrovertibly that LENR is much too complex, too new, too rich, unexpected, complex, diversified, too messy, overly dynamic and multi-facetted to be understood and solved (as energy source) by Physicists And physicists, especially nuclear physicists are firmly convinced that LENR belongs to them and only to them. It is a paradox: physicists are not good and not 'broad' enough for LENR but own it.The majority still tries to kill LENR based on ideological reasons a nice, goodwilled minority tries to develop it with insufficient means. LENR must be first converted ina technologically viable form to be understood and made useful at the heigth of its Earth changing potential. LENR is so much more than physics only!My editorial of yesterday was in great lines a fiasco. My message:"Damn the theories, full speed ahead with the technological research"was not understood well- there is no other option because technologically underdeveloped forms of LENR are also not controlable, not manageable and will not deliver the experimental data that are absolutely necessary for building the group of theories that describe what we call today LENR.It is again a paradox related to the first one. Of Catch 22 type (defined so "a requirement that cannot be met until a prerequisite requirement is met, however, the prerequisite cannot be obtained until the original requirement is met.)"correct understanding of LENR can be attained only after technological development which must be developed only on basis of prior correct understanding"Today Andrea Rossi has revealed a third paradox: the e-Cat can operate byond the melting temperature of nickel! Till now we "knew" that melting of nickel stops the process, this being good for the safety. Now we hear the contrary; does it mean that the reactions can take place in molten metal too? (I hope it is not about some say tungsten islands on a sea of Ni).

Italo R.July 29th, 2015 at 2:00 AMDear Dr Rossi, as we know the melting temperature of the nickel is 1455 ° C.I wonder if this is the maximum possible temperature of reactor operation or if, under special conditions, this temperature can be overcome (still working well), without destructive hot spots.Kind Regards,Italo R.

7. A process of fusion of these entangled atoms occurs whereby the energy of this fusion(s) event is absorbed by the SPP BEC. This energy is transferred to the SPP BEC via a special kind of multiply connected wormhole connecting the fusion events to the SPP BEC. What triggers the fusion of the entangled atoms is not known. It might be the probabilistic resolution of quantum superposition between the entangled atoms and the SPP soliton.

8. As the SPP BEC gathers and increases its energy content over time, the SPP BEC will eventually reach a energy storage limit and explode when its size of the soliton grows beyond 100 microns. This is called a Bosenova. These explosions release the energy stored in the SPP soliton which contains both electrons and photons (soft x-ray and extreme ultraviolet) from the SPP BEC.

This theory explains how LENR experiments having observed up to 10^13 DD Rydberg matter based fusion events can occur in a few nanoseconds. OTHERI have explained you yesterday my history with the Motivational Literature- very important if we consider that (as I believe it) the Theory of Management in broad sense is the new Philosophy.This is good Motivational Literature: https://thinksuccessworkshop.com/optin#John C. Maxwell going to reveal the 10 thinking practices that set apart highly successful people. We need many highly successful LENR-ists!

Tuesday, July 28, 2015

OBSTACLE MANAGEMENT OF LENR JUSTIFIES "WHY TECHNOLOGY FIRST"!MOTTOSuccess is not measured by what you accomplish, but by the opposition you have encountered, and the courage with which you have maintained the struggle against overwhelming odds. (Orison Swett Marden)

This is a pearl of the motivational literature and as such it can accomplish the performance of beingboth true and untrue in the same time. During my websearch years I have written 437 columns of motivational literature- mainly translated from English to Romanian so I can claim being kind of motivational expert or at least erudite. In this case - the Motto- actually without accomplishments who wil appreciate you, increase your payment just because you have heroically confronted odds and obstacles?the final result is important the quality of the solution you have worked out for a very difficult problem.However "obstacle management" is a very important skill, both in life and in profession. And , now, for the sake of LENR I want to contribute to Obstacles management with a definition/description of what was done, many times unknowingly.As problem solvers and LENR-ist we are confronted with many obstacles. At a moment of LENR history, as disappointing than so many other mmoments I have asked rhetorically: "what is the antonym, opposite of "short-cut?" "long-cut" soundsprimitive. so eventually I have coined "OBSTACLED WAY" - but as far I know no English dictionary has accepted it as was the case with "ego out" and "memecracy"Obviously the way of LENR is a tortuous obstacled way, so our progress depends on obstacle management. My philosophy, as shown in my FQXI essay and in many places on this blog is based on the priority and preponderance of the negative and this leads to the rule:"REMOVE THE OBSTACLES FIRST!But take a look to LENR the greatest obstacle, as more recent surveys have also shown it is in everyday language- nobody knows what LENR is, more poetically: LENR is a deep mystery, scientists complain LENR has no one valid theory and technologists say that existing many theories are of no help for them. Lack of theory is a huge obstacle.So many good people, people I admire, people with the highest accomplishments say in an ad-hoc chorus that it is not permitted, not rational, not reasonable to reverse the natural order of things- it is a MUST- we have first to understand LENR, to know what, how and why it works, we have to explore a broad area of critical parameters, we have to have absolute safety before even trying to build a technology. Axiom-like, isn't it?Despite all this, I am thinking differently- take I have not told that I thinking the opposite- the things are never what they seem and are never simple.And this is an old decision I took it in 1995 - it is written in my paper "WHY TECHNOLOGY FIRST?" If somebody wants to read it- it is here: http://egooutpeters.blogspot.ro/2014/07/about-slow-progress-and-crazy.html It is well known that my favorite meta-sport is swimming counter-stream but in this case my reasoning is based on things that I dare to think and say:a) it is impossible to have a good LENR theory now;b) actually LENR is a multiple chain of events all needing explanations some of these coming from branches of Science in state of birth just now;c) revealing of the theories must go simultaneously with a profound metamorphosisof matter implied in LENR in the style:"make hydrogen more reactive and nickel more receptive" of DGT, the operative LENR theories will be more like recipes.There is no other way, no royal shortcut. Ask Rossi if you wish, in the best case he will show you his newest scientific theory trying to convince you that the theory is useful for his technology, this being the scientifically correct behavior. But let's translate the Technology First idea in the language of Obstacle Management. The rule is indeed "remove obstacles first!" but you shall not think rigidly. If it happens you meet an obstacle so huge that it is irremovable, see if it is indeed a fatal, deadly obstacle, try to tame it in some way- than take the wise decision to make a detour and to learn how to coexist with the obstacle.Remove the other obstacles and when the Problem is solved in the greatest extent possible come back to the great obstacle and you will have a surprise: you can liquidate it easily, obstacles are aging even faster than humans and get weaker.So let's do Technology First with courage and responsibility and be convinced a splendid bouquet of theories, of many colors, will eventually appear.DAILY NEWS

KD:We believe it will work, but this does not mean that it will work, likewise a lover believes that his beloved lady will fall in love with him, but not always the story goes this way. This is a matter of fact we have to take notice of.Warm Regards,A.R.AXIL DIXIT

The overarching theme of this essay is to explain how neutrons are only transmuted from protons as a result of beta decay mediated under the control of the weak force. Nuclear decay requires the weak force and neutron production requires nuclear decay. Nuclear decay resulting in the production of neutrons from protons must occur INSIDE the nucleus.

To start off, quantum mechanics (QM) is a sometimes thing. Sometimes it does this and sometimes it does that. What QM does is based on probability. Nuclear decay is subject to the vagaries of probability. The production of a neutron from a proton is a sometimes thing. Because of the transient nature of beta decay, we cannot depend on nuclear decay to drive the LENR process. LENR must be produced by an absolutely certain cause...a cause that is guarantied to occur. Descriptions of what quantum mechanics does is absolutely adverse to absolute statements. And at the same time, it is nearly impossible to predict how subatomic particles and energy interact to get to the results that are later observed in LENR.

Next, the weak force is one of the four fundamental forces that govern all matter in the universe While the other forces hold things together, the weak force plays a greater role in things falling apart, or decaying. In nuclear physics, beta decay (β-decay) is a type of nucleon re-balancing function in which a proton is transformed into a neutron, or vice versa, INSIDE an atomic nucleus. This process allows the atom to move closer to the optimal ratio of protons and neutrons. Atoms want to have a one for one balance of protons and neutrons INSIDE the nucleus.

The weak force, or weak interaction that is responsible for turning a proton into a neutron is only effective at incredibly short distances. It acts on the subatomic level and plays a crucial role in keeping the number of protons and neutrons balanced in the nucleus or for converting stray neutrons that somehow get outside the nucleus and away from their proton partners into protons.

So it is seen that INSIDE the nucleus, the quark changes its flavor when interacting via the W- or W+. This interaction cannot be observed outside the nucleus because quarks do not exist outside the nucleus. Because of quark confinement, isolated quarks are not observed and the weak force only works in decay processes inside the nucleus. I am ignoring the decay of subatomic particles associated with nuclear processes.

There are many neutrons inside of atoms and they are universally stable when protons and neutrons are paired together INSIDE the nucleus. But if there is a very large mismatch in the number of protons or neutrons INSIDE the nucleus, a neutron can decay into a proton or a proton can become a neutron. When a neutron is outside of the nucleus, it will decay into a proton, positron and a neutrino. But in order for a stray neutron to decay into a proton, positron and neutrino, a very heavy W boson is needed to be born out of the energy of the vacuum to mediate the decay of the neutron through the weak force.

The weak force only manifests itself INSIDE the nucleus or INSIDE the neutron, not in or around the proton or the electron. The weak force is absolutely required to turn a proton into a neutron. In order for the weak force to manifest outside the nucleus, a massive W boson must be born out of the vacuum. Under the rules of virtual particle production, the probability that this huge amount of virtual energy could be borrowed from the vacuum is proportional to the mass of the W boson. Since the W boson is one of the heaviest boson that there can be... it is huge, the probability that the W boson will come into existence unbidden from the vacuum is vanishingly small. And if the W boson were generated from the vacuum, it would only be around for a very short time since its lifetime is inversely proportional to its mass. And if it did spring into existence from the vacuum, it would need to be produced and located within .1 percent of the diameter of the proton* to properly project the weak force during it almost near instantaneously short lifetime.

* ( the weak interaction involves the exchange of the intermediate vector bosons, the W and the Z. Since the mass of these particles is on the order of 80 GeV, the uncertainty principle dictates a range of about 10-18 meters which is about .1% of the diameter of a proton.)

The bottom line, the probability that the weak force affects subatomic particles OUTSIDE the nucleus is almost ZERO.

In beta plus decay, for a proton to become a neutron requires the proton to decay into a neutron, a positron, and a neutrino OUTSIDE of the nucleus. This virtual neutrino must be produced out of the energy of the vacuum just in the vanishingly short time that the W boson is in existence. This probability of two such extremely unlikely event occurring simultaneously is so small that this nearly impossible combination of events can occur together is close to zero.

Now in a 1 megawatt LENR reactor, there needs to be 10^25 LENR reactions more or less happening during each and every second. This implies that the LENR reaction must be a sure thing and absolutely prolific. Because of timing, the range of the weak force, and the large energies involved, the probability of the creation of neutrons outside the nucleus is almost zero. This beta decay OUTSIDE the nucleus therefore cannot be the cause of LENR.

Yes, neutrons are produced by LENR but that creation must be a result of beta decay INSIDE the nucleus after the proton has become a part of the nucleus and the weak force must subsequently re -balance the number of protons and neutrons to keep the nucleus in the zone of stability.

For all who propose the creation of neutrons OUTSIDE the nucleus as the root cause of LENR, they must address how the rules of the standard model, the production of virtual particles from the vacuum and the nature of beta decay and color change through the weak force are changed to allow this neutron production process to move forward with such great intensity and rapidity. Its not just meeting the requirements of energy balance, it’s meeting all the other conservation laws involved with beta decay and obeying all the rules of road for the standard m

Monday, July 27, 2015

MOTTO

Truths are, in the best case, perfectible, only lies can be perfect (Yves Henri Prum)

I think Lew Larsen's attack against my blog/me was not a good idea, many times in life and in technology almost always , useless things are more harmful thand bad things/actions. But this gaffe can create an opportunity, I thought. It is a very wild dispute between nuclearists and W-L people and this shows they are starting from different premises- the logic from there to conclusions being necessarily the same.So let's them meet and start again from the basics of the very basics- it must be some toxic misunderstanding here!Let's build bridges between the two groups all the LENR theories have flying roots and not much contact with the experimental reality so why not discuss. If there is no possibility of understanding and peace, at least we have tried Because LENR Cities is in contact with the Larsenless branch of W-L theory I wrote the following to the Leaders of LENR Cities:"Please consider this as kind of OPEN LETTER to LENR-Cities.

LENR-Cities is strongly and friendly associated with a group of scientists that belong to the Widom-Larsen theory, considered by many from the LENR community, a heterodoxy.

Not by me, I have expressed my most serious doubts that Cold Fusion is entirely nuclear or nuclear in the usual way, some 20 years ago- see please the attached paper published in the first issue of Infinite Energy.(also there I predicted that technology and engineering will be more important for

building a new energy source-as nuclear physics, the scientific method, science,

This was two days ago- I wrote about a slide share authored by Lewis Larsen and new wave physicist AXIL has commented on it quite positively. Surprisingly,a bit even psychiatrically Lewis Larsen has attacked me telling that I am a seller of misinformation on the W-L theory, very unjust. He ignored or forgot for example that on my blog I repeatedly said that the fierce hostility against W-L is an exaggeration and there do not exist successful nuclear theories superior to a non-nuclear.

OK, I answered to Lewis and he has not reacted more, possibly very busy or this is this style.

HOWEVER- I think this is an opportunity for a new start- see please what I wrote about fragmentation and fragmented truths.

I am inviting all your theorist W-L friends to express their opinions, ideas, theories on my blog EGO OUT freely, no censoring and to start a constructive dialogue with other readers of my blog let's make bridge building.

The LENR community is in deep trouble: we don't know a lot of essential things, have not found the actionable parameters, Andrea Rosssi is dominating the technological development quite alone and is moving slowly.

We have to diminish fragmentation of LENR and start serious technological progress.

Basta! (enough! in Italian)

Yours as always,

Peter

I think we can and will many other Bridges in the LENR community and to it! Please send ideas.

LENR Phenomena and Potential Applications, Professor Peter Hagelstein and Dr. Louis DeChiaroAbstractBack in 1989 Fleischmann and Pons astonished the world with a variety of claims involving low-energy nuclear reactions (LENR) in electrochemical experiments with palladium and deuterium. The most significant of the claims was for the generation of large amounts of energy, presumed to be of nuclear origin, but without a commensurate amount of energetic nuclear radiation. The existence of such an effect goes against textbook nuclear and solid state physics, and no acceptable explanation was put forth at the time. Most early efforts to replicate the anomalies claimed were unsuccessful. The Fleischmann-Pons Experiment was not accepted by mainstream scientists then and is not accepted today.

Over the years a substantial amount of effort has been put in by groups that were able to replicate the excess heat effect, to make sure that the effect was real, and to gain some understanding. Fleischmann and Pons had argued that the D/Pd loading ratio needed to be high in order to see excess heat; this was found to be the case in experiments that followed. A correlation was found between the excess power produced and the deuterium flux at the cathode surface. In some experiments increased excess heat was seen at elevated temperature. He-4 was observed in the gas phase, correlated with the energy produced, and in amounts consistent with the mass difference (24 MeV) between D2 and He-4.

There is no agreement at present among those in the field as to what physics is involved in these experiments, even though there have been a large number of proposals. We give a brief outline of some of the theoretical ideas currently being contemplated. Progress continues at present, but there are changes in the focus of the research and in the researchers involved. There is at present some interest on the part of investors and industry, stimulated by the possibility of commercial products and the prospect of a new technology. We will review some of the approaches which have been discussed in public in recent years and will summarize the progress reported by the entrepreneur community, including Andrea Rossi (Industrial Heat, Inc.), Dr. Mitchell Swartz (Nanortech, Inc.), and Robert Godes (Brillouin Energy Technologies, Inc.). Finally, we will touch upon the recent status changes at USPTO regarding LENR inventions.2a) Rossi’s Hot Cat Hopes [Update #2: New Model Running Now

Sunday, July 26, 2015

Today, under the pressure of events I will write about the fragmentation of the LENR community; fragmentation is an amazingly and tragically general social phenomenon, not specific for us- but damaging in any case- we are under siege we need solidarity (not liquidarity or gasidarity)MOTTO from a poem of Ady Endre, Hungarian author: "Tracking On A Cart Tonight

Every Whole is broken now,

Every light is scattered and flashing,

Every love is splitting and crashing,

Every Whole is broken now."

It is really strange to see how religions that are the most powerful life organizers and sources of sense and significance and truth- have been irreversibly fragmented. See please:The fragmentation of Christianity, from 1 to thousands of faith groups http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_true2.htmThe Muslim religion is also tragically fragmented and I learn on the Internet that the Prophet has predicted this in a hadith:"The Jews were split up into seventy-one or seventy-two sects; and the Christians were split up into seventy one or seventy-two sects; and my community will be split up into seventy-three sects."

This fatal fragmentation- also destructive for all ideologies is beyond my operative understanding but surely it has something to do with the fragmented Truths- see please my writing about Pareto Truths or my FQXI essay.

It is more than obvious that the LENR community is also very fragamented and it is quite depressing to see how sincerely the "fragments"- both of PdD and NiH are hating each other.

However the deepest and most furious Schism is between the proponents of the Wisdom Larsen non-nuclear theory of Widom and Larsen.

It had comments but not from the mainstream LENR people or from the Widom-Larsen group.

It happens yesterday I have informed you about a new slide-share of Lew Larsen; AXIL has commented it quite nicely I think.

To my surprise, on a forum Larsen has commented very harshly. It is about me/Ego Out and negative, soI can reproduce it here:

"Peter Gluck has become a purveyor of disinformation about the Widom-Larsen theory of LENRs"

Re July 25, 2015 Ego-Out blogpost on CMNS today:

in re-publishing certain comments recently made by an individual who posts on the Vortex-L mailing list under the screen nom de plume of “Axil Axil”, Peter Gluck has become a public purveyor of inaccurate disinformation about the Widom-Larsen theory of LENRs.

Diametrically opposite to what is stated and seemingly implied in Axil Axil’s grotesquely inaccurate technical statements and inferences about our theoretical work and its conceptual history over the past 10+ years, the interrelated ideas of collective, many-body quantum-mechanically entangled surface plasmon electrons interacting electromagnetically with collective, many-body collections of quantum-mechanically entangled protons (or deuterons) in micron-scale LENR-active surface sites been an integral component of our theory since the very beginning. This fact is evidenced in our Cornell physics arXiv preprint in 2005 and subsequent publication in theEuropean Physical Journal C – Particles and Fields in 2006. In that paper, we estimated the size of such LENR-active sites --- called “coherent domains” in the paper (which is an equivalent way of saying many-body Q-M entangled ‘patch’) --- at 1 to 10 microns. In 2009, for a variety of reasons I revised that estimate of coherent domain size upward to ~ 100 microns and published it in a Lattice technical document on SlideShare.

Thus, these many-body collective quantum entanglement concepts are not some new, recent developmental twist in our theory as Axil Axil would apparently have unknowing readers believe (who may be unfamiliar with the detailed conceptual history and evolution of our work).

I chose to publish a Lattice technical PowerPoint about the recent Physical Review Letters paper by Daskalakis et al because in our theory LENR-active sites function very much like microcavities and the surface plasmons confined within the physical dimensions of such many-body ‘patches’ have predicted properties that are essentially identical to the micron-scale room temperature plasmon condensates observed by Daskalakis et al in their outstanding laboratory experiments. Thus their first-ever room temperature plasmon condensate measurements are supportive of the Widom-Larsen’s theory’s longstanding concept of the many-body collective behavior of plasmons in LENR-active sites.

Paul:In this moment here it is 01.20 a.m. of Sunday July 26.The new Hot Cat is just started. She is promising well, but obviously before saying anything worth to be listened is necessary a period of several days.Warm RegardsA.R.Andrea RossiJuly 25th, 2015 at 7:23 PM

Gian Luca:The aim of our R&D is to prepare an industrial massive production of a product that must have a very competitive price; if the new version will work ( I cannot know if it works or not before due R&D) it will have higher COP, more energy density, lower price, but, again, it has even to be started up for the first time. If it does not work, we’ll base the industrial production on the Hot Cat concept we already have and that has been tested in Lugano by the Independent Third Party.Warm Regards,A.R.Andrea RossiJuly 25th, 2015 at 7:17 PM

Gian Luca:The new version is smaller, I hope it will have a higher energy density.Warm Regards,A.R.

Seen in a broader sense the man is right if the keys are actually lost for ever e.g. fallen in the river, down the sewer channel or existing only in the imagination of the drunkard. Then it is logical to make the "search" as easy and pleasant as possible.minimum effort and trouble is the best way to do the useless impossible.There are still so many absolute skeptics in matter of cold fusion who consider that is irrelevant on which way we go, we will arrive nowhere in any and all acses.But my target is not skeptics, but the nice, smiling friendly enemy within full of the best intentions. Leader, guru the Savior, knowing all the facts and having even more solid healthy certainties than facts,possessing all the best skills, splendid CV, - knowing the very best places to search for the lost keys, expert, tireless and very productive experimenter - good results but no breakthroughs, educator, scholar, paternal, mentor, honestly helpful, LENR erudite. Merciless executioner of all the false ideas.He or she is a living treasure for the field. It is a pity he or she is an imaginary being. More or less.

Intermezzo - my troubles with people having perfect memoryIn the 7th class of the Lyceum, professor B was teaching usGeograhy of the Soviet Union- he remembered everything and has terrorized us to know the anme of smll villages around copper mines and so many details that it was real Hell, it was very difficult to pass the exams. A convinced communist and amateur sadist- he wasworse than The Abominable Mr. Gunn by Robert Graves, Professor B was living in the same house as my cousin Andrew so we knew he is systematically beating his wife and his son Dan- our age, a poor frightened chicken. I took pragmatically the problem, exercising my memory with those useless names. I even amazed B when he asked me once about Armenia- you already know that in my life, schooling, career- my memory was always much more useful than my intelligence. Three years later B was the first person ever I watched dying of cancer- his howls were terrible.At the University Professor C. taught us technology; due to his formidable memory knew a lot of details data but was less skilled to explain the logic, spirit, leading principles, beauty of them. He was an know-it-all techno-bureaucrat. However he had his fans, followers and admirers. Thanks Fatum our professor of plastics macromolecular chemistry and technology was a genuine technologist, my model.It happens that Professor C died in car accident many years later, in meantime becoming a better educator (his memory was less precise)A weird case was my colleague Livius C. who claimed very aggressively tha it is no man of culture who does not know at least 300 names of painters from Middle Age and the Renaissance- this was his fixa idea. Having no Internet in that time, I used a encyclopedia and the guy was not bragging he knew over 400 till we stopped. Cui prodest? He had no talent for painting was no billionaire to collect them. This was an example of useless knowledge. Poor Livius -has abandoned the Univesrity became a school teacher. His life was destroyed by the communist authority becaus he adhered to a sexual minority.These were three unhappy examples of erudites, people who know much while having a low position on the DIKW scale (DATA-INFORMATION-KNOWLEDGE-WISDOM)

In Science and/or Technology the erudite can be good in Know-What, can contribute to the Know-How because he/she is industrious, hyperactive but usually has serious troubles with the superior skills Know-Why and Know Why Not.It is better to work with people who know what they have to know, undeerstand what they know, can apply it and, are insatiable learners. What they know is not an obstacle to what they have to learn.

Albert N.:Because I made a revolution in it. It is a completely new thing that, by my calculatons, should ( SHOULD) improve the “classic” one. It is an attempt: if it goes, the improvement, in term of ssm, will be strong. Otherwise, it is a wrong idea. The only way to know is to make an experiment. The funny part is how I got this idea: after the hernia surgery, when I woke up from the total anesthesy I got through, I had to stay some hour in a room, with pain. I am used to overcome pain relaxing and focusing strongly in something; obviously I focused on a new reactor and it came out. Now we did it, tomorrow goes in action. We’ll see if she is an abort or a baby. If she is a baby, is a M.me Curie!Warm Regards,A.R.Does plasma power the E-Cat (Hank Mills)http://www.e-catworld.com/2015/07/25/does-plasma-power-the-e-cat-hank-mills/

Widom-Larsen theory concepts is coming along nicely. This theory explains how Bose condensation is central to the quantum causation of the LENR reaction. But is still missing the boat on the details of the ultimate reason for the activation of the reaction. Widom-Larsen theory’s concept still holds that low energy neutron production is the underlying causative mechanism of the LENR reaction. It is sad that the old nuclear engineering paradigm is still got W-L theory paralyzed by 20th century thinking.

The ultimate causation mechanism of the LENR reaction is ENTANGLEMENT. It is amazing how fundamental that entanglement is in our universe. The new theories in physics posits entanglement is the fundamental cause of just about everything that is important in the goings on in our universe from gravity, to time, to the instantaneous projection of the 2 dimensional holographic surface reality on the event horizon of the universe to the embedded 4 dimensional space time universe that we live in. Then there is thermodynamics that is based on entanglement and the arrow of time that it provides.

Widom-Larsen theory has shown a remarkable ability to accept new ideas in the LENR paradigm. I hope before the end of this century comes to pass that this top tier LENR theory can make the jump to the entanglement mechanism. As the first step, entanglement is why the formation of a Bose condensate is so important to the LENR process.

But here is an other writing of Axil:

At a minimum, It seems to me that LENR can take at least three forms. For brevity, I will call them the Rossi type, the Papp type, and the Cluster type. The Papp and the cluster type might be the same type. For a rocket application, the Papp type might be best. Leif Holmild might have produced Papp LENR that might generate massive amounts of high energy protons and alpha particles from D D fusion in his latest experiments. The protons are fusion based at 14 MeV in energy level so they are fast moving. I suspect that R. Mills is using this Papp type of LENR in his sun cell. Holmild is using a laser pulse to produce cluster fusion of deuterium by blasting at iron oxide doped with potassium catalyst covered with Rydberg matter based deuterium to produce huge amounts of cluster fusion. Both Papp and R. Mills are using an electric arc to produce explosive fusion of hydrogen(Mills uses water - and also Papp) that produces a explosion of gas but no heat.

I had always believed that a hybrid fusion process of using the dense plasma fusion plasmoid that is produced in the focused fusion(FF) process might be used to activate the Papp LENR process. This method might be a good way to produce a powerful beam of abundant protons focused and accelerated down a tight focused beam generated by the plasmoid. If the potassium based Holmild catalyst was blasted by a FF plasmoid, a lot of protons and alpha particles might be projected in a beam out of the back of the FF electrode. And it might not require that much of an electric arc to fire up that hybrid fusion process.

The nuclear rocket is such an attractive concept for space exploration that the space fairing nations of the world have repeatedly experimented with this concept for the last 50 years in an attempt to perfect this idea. Even with the great dangers and disadvantages in this approach involving radioactive contamination of vast swaths of their countries, its promise is overwhelming to the rocket engineers if not the population unser the fall of radioctive debris resulting from a launch failure.

As a thermal rocket that heats liquid hydrogen to 1400C, a nuclear rocket’s specific impulse is equal to that of the space shuttle. The specific impulse is a measure that can be thought of as thrust divided by propellant mass per unit time. If the temperature of the hydrogen exhaust gas can be raised between 2000C and 3000C degrees, its specific impulse would be great enough to lift 10 to 20 times the payload of the space shuttle into orbit using the same size vehicle. Truly, if a safe source of refectory level heat can be found to heat hydrogen gas to incandescence, or even just beyond 1000C, the door to the exploitation and commercialization of the solar system would be thrown wide opened to space based exploration and utilization.

Now, with the advent of the Hot Cat, a way to heat hydrogen rocket exhaust gas could now provide a safe and effective way to lift massive amounts of payload into orbit at a greatly reduced cost. The LENR boost vehicle could do more for space exploration than the Space Elevator could ever do and it would be a lot less expensive.

The design goal of such a LENR booster is to produce 4 gigawatts of heat for 170 seconds. How could this be done? Well let’s figure out a way to get many Hot cat alumina reactors to melt down at a controlled and sustained rate.

Let’s feed hot cat inches long reactor rods of alumina into a chamber of heat and EMF excitation to melt down like a steam engine burns coal. A bin full of Hot cat rods can be fed from a hopper into an Hot cat ignition chamber where other hot cats are in various stages of melt down mixed with liquid hydrogen. A Cat and mouse process would keep the Hot cat chamber at 3000C for the 20 seconds that it takes each Hot cat tube to disintegrate. The bottom of tthe Hot cat tube pile would be the hottest the the top of the pile just starting the burnup process. A screen of refractory material at the end of the ignition chamber would allow Hot cat fragments comprised of ruby dust and the vapor of nickel powder to be expelled out of the reaction nozzle along with the heated hydrogen. This should allow the Hot cat booster to achieve orbit in a single stage. But I am sure that once all you who want to explore and utilize space put your minds to this task, you all can come up with a far more elegant solution to LENR booster technology.